Do you believe democracy is prone to corruption?

I believe it is simply by the power of checks and balances that the United States is unable to move forward as a country. Judicial>Legislative>Executive and vice versa they all check each other. So before anything is approved they need to go to another branch. This has led america to an unfounded number of incidents where scandle and corruption is able to roam freely untouched. The players stay in charge while the public figures wallow unable to do a single thing. Almost stationary, I believe a more streamlined democracy is warrented not this excuse of one. What do you think?

What Girls Said 0

What Guys Said 8

The thing about democracy is, No single person has any real power. Thus making corruption only possible if almost ALL of government is corrupt under a similar objective (Which is virtually impossible).

a lot of people like to think that Obama is the one in power and he can do anything he wants and he legalized LGBT marriage and stuff, But in reality, He has near no power. If wants shit done, It gets put to a vote and approved, He himself has no real power to make his ideas happen, thats the responsibility of congress and the American people.Like, Obama is getting all this praise for Legalizing LGBT, When in actualy fact, Obama literally had fuck all to do with it.

That is true. Personally I don't like Obama, nor the last slew of presidents after clinton. I will say this though the president does have the ability of clandestine power in operation under JSOC; which lets be honest here Obama is no war time president. As far as LGBT it was bound to happen, people say things like 9/11 happened under bush its all his fault. and of course the retort 100% is Obama let ISIS get away, he's spineless. The president to me is little more than a representative of something bigger. Personally I think most conspiracy theories are a bunch of utter crap, but for some reason it makes sense to me.

Probably less so than other forms of government, simply because power is distributed between more people (you'd have to bribe a lot more people to get what you want - and at least one or two of them are likely to have some moral fibre).

There are two big reasons why the USA can't move forward as a country - the constitution and the bible. Far too many Americans have been brainwashed into placing far too much importance on whether those two documents allow something, and far too little on whether or not it is actually a good idea and benefits the country.

Human beings are prone to corruption. Every single form of government, religion, economics, or any other system involving human interaction that has ever existed and can result in some form of reward has corruption in it.

We are not actually a democracy. We're a republic. Until we abolish the Federal Reserve, anything we the people do is meaningless. The founding fathers (except for Hamilton) were strongly opposed to central banks having control over the currency. They had seen how the banks controlled Europe. The banks still managed to weasel their way in, and the Federal Reserve solidified that power. Senators have been trying to audit the Fed for decades with no luck, and several prominent politicians have died in plane crashes after prying into the Fed.

Many people don't seem to know that the Fed is NOT a government institution. They print fiat currency with no backing and LOAN it to us with interest. Every president who has issued interest free US-backed currency has been assassinated (Lincoln and Kennedy). Garfield was also a strong opponent of the banks. He was killed four months after being elected. Andrew Jackson survived an assassination attempt by a British agent with ties to the Rothschild bank in London. He famously told his vice president "the banks, Mr. Van Buren, are trying to kill me."

People are ignorant sheep these days.

2

1|1

0|0

Anonymous

I think if you were to take a course in democratic political theory at a local university you would probably enjoy it, though it would also probably knock down many of the current beliefs you have.

Stirring the pot, eh? Perhaps it might even open my eyes. However, I am seeing this first hand not based upon theory. As I keep up on current and political news based upon both leaked information and public politics it has become abundantly clear that it is in fact corrupt; of course there is way more to go on than just a theory of corruption. The wonderful part about checks and balances as seen first hand is that it not only diminishes power on a singular party but stops the machine all together. Keeping the otherwise good people out and bad people in power. But I couldn't argue against the relativity you have to this question since you did take that course, right?

If anything it is less corrupt. Democracy is self-correcting, it gets to a certain level of corruption and finds an equilibrium. In other forms of government nothing corrects the corruption or exposes it (which is why they may seem less corrupt) so it just builds and builds until their is a violent revolution.

This is one of those things where the quote, you can't see the forrest for the tree's comes into play. This isn't to berate you, but think... what better place to breed loads of corruption and power than in a stagnant government. Much like a stagnant pond, if you do not clean it, it grows algae.